and thank you for watching state of the union. i'm candy crowley in washington. head to cnn.com/sotu for analysis and the extras. if you missed any part of today's show, find us on itunes. just search state of the union. fareed zakaria "gps" is next for our viewers here in the united states. this is "gps the global public square." welcome to all of you in the united states and around the world,ium i'm fareed zakaria. it's oscar time. raised issues about foreign policy. to the efficacy of torture to our policy towards iran. we'll talk abut all these issues still confronting us in real life with the terrific panel including the former director of the cia, michael hayden. iran might be moving towards a nuclear weapon, but seems to becoming apart internally with

political in fighting that makes washington look civilized by comparison. we'll ask two experts to explain what's going on. why are we being bombarded by meteors and asteroids and what's the difference anyway? i'll talk to our favorite astrophysicist. but, first, here's my take. with big budget cuts looming, it might seem crazy to talk about new spending but i'll try anyway. here's a plea for tiny but vital increase in federal spending. in his state of the union address president obama promised to expand early childhood education for children from poor families. this is an important idea that could become to help address a huge problem in america. the lack of economic mobility. america has long been seen as the place where anyone can make it, yet, studies over the past two decades point to a different

reality. economic mobility in the u.s. is low compared to what it was in times past and with current levels in many european countries in canada. you hear all about rags to riches stories, but they are the exceptions. a comprehensive study by the pew economic mobility documents that in the u.s. today few poor people become even upper middle class. now, some of the criticism of president obama's program has come from people who worry about the government's track record in the area of early childhood education. they point to head start, the long-standing program that provides this education to disadvantaged children. the department of health and human services released a study of head start in 2010 which was updated in 2012 that positive effects begin to fade in a few years. this has led many to call the program a failure and urged the government not to throw good money after bad. people are jumping to conclusions about a very

complicated subject without understanding the study or social science research. three scholars from the university of chicago and university of california davis painstakingly explained why it is premature to reject head start. they know many factors may have intervened to erode the early gains in test scores. for example, there have been sharp rises in single parent families and rises in nonenglish speaking households and rises in severe health problems like diabetes. most important, some studies show the test scores level out children who have been through early education do better in their professional lives. the more we learn about neuro science, the clearer it becomes that the human brain develops much sooner than we believe. early education can be highly effective. look at the data from the rest of the world. a 2012 report from the oecd concludes that early childhood

education, "improves children's cognitive abilities, helps to create a foundation for life-long learning, reduces poverty and improves social mobility from generation to generation." in many rich countries, 90% of 3 year olds get early childhood education. the average for 4 year olds is 81%. in the u.s., it is only 69%. and those children tend to be from middle and upper middle class families. american government set the pace for education for the past 150 years. we've been the first country to offer mass education anywhere. that lead is now gone. obama's proposals will help the u.s. start to catch up in the great struggle for high-quality human capital that is going to define the next century. for more on this, you can read my column in this week's "time" magazine. let's get started.

spies and spy agencies are all over the big screen and in theni nigews these days. hack attacks from china and a new debate over drones and the still-running controversy over torture, which bubbled up again with "zero dark thirty" oscar nominations. national security with a panel of people who come at it from different angles. michael hayden director of cia and nsa and a global security advisory firm. reuel marc gerecht is now senior fellow at the foundation for the defense of democracies. richard haass former top national security official under both presidents bush. he is now president of the council on foreign relations and the author of a forthcoming book "foreign policy begins at home." and jane harman retired from

congress after nine terms. a leading legislature on issues flout her career and now runs the woodrow wilson center in washington. with that stack of resumes, i hope to god we have an interesting conversation. >> go to a break now. >> let's talk about drones, richard, you took a fairly strong stance for republican national security official. you think we've gone too far with drone strikes. >> i do. i think we ought to make them possible. they do some good. on the other hand, we have to realize they're one tool in the arsenal. we don't want to alienate governments and populations. the whole idea is to gain progress in the war against terrorists and terrorism. i think essentially we've probably shot them off a little too frequently and haven't limited them quite enough to high-value targets and high chance of success and little bit too much willingness to use them when we think there is a chance the terrorists might be involved in a certain activity. i don't want to stop them, fareed. we don't want to go the other extreme and make it casual or

something of an everyday affair. >> jane, you have a suggestion. you say let's get some kind of institutionalized legalized process, drone courts, you call them. >> well, beyond drone courts. i have lived the entire fisa cycle and it worked very well for 23 years. it established the intelligence committees on the hill and a specialized court to review efforts to read the communications or hear them between people. i think that framework could fit drone strikes. i agree with richard, they should be very occasional, but they're necessary and when they're necessary, not only americans, but foreigners should be assured that america abides by the rule of law. >> mike, you face these issues front and center. what jane is describing is, i think, a significantly reduced use of drone strikes. could you live with that? running the cia? >> fareed, keep in mind that circumstances change.

as richard pointed out, what may have been necessary and very appropriate for a battlefield four, five or six years ago may not be the same today. look, we're a bit safer than we have been in the past. we have had great success. some measure due to drone strikes. once again, i wouldn't take them totally off the table. we need to be able to defend ourselves with all the tools available. with regard to the drone courts, i'm personally not comfortable with that. putting a judicial body between the president and any of his operating forces. but we need to develop a mechanism that most of america feels comfortable about we're doing. i don't think it's a court, but some sort of review, a commission named by the president and congress that doesn't get into the chain of command, but reviews drone operations. and reports to both of the political branches with very prominent and trustworthy americans and trusted americans on such a commission may give the kind of political

sustainability that programs like this need over the long term if they're going to continue. >> i worry about some kind of a commission. i don't know what training they would have and the record on commissions is fairly bleak, let's just start with bowles-simpson. >> reuel, one of the collateral issues with drone strikes is the issue of civilian damage, collateral damage to people who may not be al qaeda. one of the things donald rumsfeld used to say about the war on terror, the question is not how many people we're killing, but are we changing the dynamics so we're not producing more of them as we keep killing them. that is one of the things that one has to take into account. if you radicalize an entire village via drone attack, maybe you've got one guy, but was it worth it? is that a calculus? >> i mean, it's possible. i think with some drone strikes, if an individual is worth a missile, perhaps he's worth

risking american lives and capture and interrogate. >> that's one of the things that stan mcchrystal is saying. we're using drones because we're trying not to push american forces out there, but maybe we, you know, the implication is sometimes we may want to take that risk. >> i agree. i think drones are are easy. they're an easy way of escaping a very hard question. and i think it behooves us to review it. i'm not terribly in favor of any type of judicial review. there are two warmaking bodies in the u.s. congress and if the senate and the house committees on intelligence want to review what the president is doing, they certainly have the authority to do so and they can get in that debate. >> let me just quickly move to another issue before we take a break because i want to get in it. the china hacking story. this is pretty serious, don't you think? >> absolutely. it raises real fundamental questions about china's commitment to the rule of law

internationally. it's a form of espionage. it's a form of economic warfare. it could be also in some ways targeting vulnerabilities in american society so should the united states and china ever have a crisis, china could either threaten to do certain things or actually do certain things, say against the american electricity grid or against the american financial system. these people aren't freelancing. you know china as well as anybody. these people are clearly operating with the tolerance of the communist party in china under the liberation army. this is serious and i think the chinese are underestimating the impact this is having about the nature of the relationship. this sends a message to americans across the board that this relationship is not what it should be if china is treating us in this way, essentially going after our information and going after potential vulnerabilities in our system, stealing our intellectual property. this is not how you want to act if you talk about words like

partn partnership. >> the chinese will say, look, you guys do it, too. why are you getting so head up? you ran the cia and the nsa. what would be your response to them? >> i'd freely admit that all nations conduct espionage, but some nations, nations like ours self-limit. we sell other nation's secrets to keep americans safe and free. we don't do it to make americans rich or to make american industry profitable and what the chinese are doing is industrial espionage, trade secrets, negotiating positions, stealing that kind of information on an unprecedented scale for chinese economic advantage. that's why i think our response should be in the economic zone. we need to make chinese cyberbehavior part of the overall portfolio of american relations and we need to begin to exact a price on the chinese in the economic sphere for what it is they're doing to us. when we come back, we'll

talk to this panel about torture. does it work? did it get osama bin laden? i think there are some people here who know the answers, when we come back. ree times the coverage. [ manager 2 ] it's like working in a giant sandbox. with all these huge toys. and with the fastest push-to-talk... i can keep track of them all. [ male announcer ] upgrade to the new "done" with access to the fastest push-to-talk and three times the coverage. now when you buy one kyocera duraxt rugged phone for $69.99, you'll get four free. other offers available. visit a sprint store, or call 855-878-4biz.

visit a sprint store, with the bing it on challenge to show google users what they've been missing on bing. let's bing it on. [fight bell: ding, ding] how many here are google users? what if i was to tell you that you would actually like bing way more than google when it came to the results? prove it. let's look up some taco places. i like the left side. yeah? okay, do we need to find out what the waves are like down at the beach? what side do you like better? i like the results on the right. i'm gonna go with the one on the left. oh! bing won! people prefer bing over google for the web's top searches. don't believe it? go to bingiton.com and see what you're missing. ♪ (train horn) vo: wherever our trains go, the economy comes to life. norfolk southern. one line,

infinite possibilities. [ male announcer ] when you wear dentures you may not know it, but your mouth is under attack. food particles infiltrate and bacteria proliferate. ♪ protect your mouth, with fixodent. the adhesive helps create a food seal defense for a clean mouth and kills bacteria for fresh breath. ♪ fixodent, and forget it. [heart beating]

[heartbeat continues] [heartbeat, music playing louder] ♪ i'm feeling better since you know me... ♪ announcer: this song was created with heartbeats of children in need. find out how it can help frontline health workers bring hope to millions of children at everybeatmatters.org. then you're going to love this. right now they're only $14.95! wow-a grt deal just got a whole lot better. hurry. $14.95 won't last. >> you guys ran iran back in the

'90s? >> i don't know. it's oscar time and best picture nominee "zero dark thirty" has brought the topic of waterboarding to the front. it makes the case that waterboarding and other enhance interrogation techniques were instrumental in finding osama bin laden. some senators and the cia disagree. let's open it up to the panel michael hayden, richard haass and jane harman. you more than anyone else can tell us, did enhanced interrogation techniques, specifically waterboarding, get us the vital information on the path to osama bin laden? >> well, fareed, we waterboarded only three people. several detainees in cia custody in which interrogation techniques were used, not including waterboarding, that formed part of the fabric, part of the tappestry of information that we'll use. if you look at the movie, it was artistically true. not factually true.

artistically, it portrayed the cia interrogation program, but factually, it was overwrought inaccurate. tight connections between the interrogation program and abbadabad. against the world and against a large fraction of the rest of the agency, which really wasn't true. this was a team effort over a long period of time. but even director panetta has pointed out that some of the information, the foreign part of that fabric and the hunt for bin laden came from detainees against whom enhance interrogation techniques have been used. >> reuel, you were in the cia director of operations, do you think from watching the movie that the portrayal, the connection between waterboarding and osama bin laden is real? >> i suspect that it did have something to do with the success. i mean, we all want there not to be a contradiction between our

ethics and counterterrorism. we want to do well by doing good. the only one problem with that, the history of counterterrorism and the history of espionage suggests that pain is a very effective tool in interrogation if used well. the debate really ought to be what is the type of pain that a liberal democracy wants to use to stop individuals from taking down skyscrapers. >> there are issues about that. can we have confidence and information that is obtained this way? i think a lot of people have looked at it and raised fundamental questions about how much confidence can you have about information you extract from someone who has undergone all these techniques. on occasion it's good. on occasion, it's not. it's hard to tell. >> fundamentally, there's no difference in an interrogation where you serve as a father and you use pain. the inform haitian has nothing to do with what the individual

says to you when he's under durs. the objective is to get the individual talking. >> jane? >> the inform agz thation i've d i'm not a trained interrogator, if you can build trust with the suspect, you have the best chance of getting accurate information. you have to verify, you have to trust, but verify. that's how, by the way, we are getting information in advance on some of the intentions of these lone wolves in our country. these are people with clean records and if their families and their communities don't trust our law enforcement and come forward and tell us what they're thinking about, we're likely not to find them. so, this technique of building trust, i think, is the one we should be using and it also portrays our values. and the goal in the end is not to play whack-a-mole here decide to strap on suicide vests or join civilized society. >> mike, how do you address that

issue because it is true that the cia seen in many parts of this, of this world as being utterly ruthless, utterly immoral and is that something you want, you have to worry about when addressing this larger issue of the, of what, again, president george w. bush used to call winning the hearts and minds of the arab world? >> no, it's very important. some activities are designed to deal with people who are already convinced they want to kill you. but you always have to keep in mind the production rate of people who want to kill you in the future. and your action is to fight the close fight may actually affect and make worse the deep battle over a long period of time. to get quite specific here, fareed, when we talk about enhanced interrogation, we rarely, if ever, asked a detainee information we didn't already know the answer to while he was undergoing the enhanced interrogation. the idea here was not to get to truth.

the idea here was to move him from a zone of defiance to a zone of cooperation. we held about 100 people. we found that we needed to do that to about a third of that 100. once you got them into the zone of cooperation, this was a conversation that went back and forth. much is portrayed in the movie when the primary source over a very decently prepared lunch began to tell the interrogators much about what they needed to know in order to begin to tra trachstrack osama bin laden. we had the information in our lower desk drawer for a decade and we got a chance to do it. the agency was asked to do things in extreme circumstances. it did it out of duty, not out of enthusiasm and i believe firmly that it made america safer because we did that. >> but you're saying, richard, that now is the time to dial back some of this.

>> in each case you have to look at all your tools and you have to look at the situation. it's not a legal question as much as it is a smart question. we want to do things and do them on ways and in balance make a tough situation less tough. we're not going to eliminate terrorism, we're going to reduce it. we want to persuade young men to make a different career choice, not to become terrorists in the first place. we always have to ask ourselves what we're going to gain in some uperation. whether it's a drone strike or interrogation technique. is it worth it in the specific situation and in the large? yeah, we dial it back a little bit, but we don't switch. we don't stop ourselves from doing things, there are going to be future attacks. we are not going to succeed all the time. it's the law of numbers. too many terrorists out there and too many means in this global world and we are too open as a society. there are times we are going to succeed and we want to reduce the number of times and severity of if and when it happens.

>> thank you, all, very much. up next, how a body of water the size of the dead sea simply disappeared from the middle east. what in the world, when we come back. searching for a bank designed for investors like you? tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 schwab bank was built with all the value and convenience tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 investors want. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 like no atm fees, worldwide. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 and no nuisance fees. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 plus deposit checks with mobile deposit. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 and manage your cash and investments tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 with schwab's mobile app. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 no wonder schwab bank has grown to over 70 billion in assets. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 so if you're looking for a bank that's in your corner, tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 not just on the corner... tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 call, click or visit to start banking with schwab bank today. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550

starts with arthritis pain and a choice. take tylenol or take aleve, the #1 recommended pain reliever by orthopedic doctors. just two aleve can keep pain away all day. back to the news. your soups are so awesomely delicious my husband and i can't stop eating 'em! what's...that... on your head? can curlers! tomato basil, potato with bacon... we've got a lot of empty cans. [ male announcer ] progresso. you gotta taste this soup.

now for our what in the world segment. imagine a large body of water, about the size of the dead sea, simply disappearing. it sounds like science fiction, but it's not. it's happening in real life and we've only just found out. a pioneering study from nasa and the university of california irvine shows how the middle east is losing its fresh water reserves. as you can see from the satellite imagery, we're going from blues and greens to yellows and reds. that's 144 cubic kilometers of lost water between 2003 and 2009. what do i mean by lost water? well, most of it comes from below the earth's surface from water trapped in rocks. you see, in times of drought, we tend to drill for water by constructing wells and pumps. but the earth has a finite

supply. nasa scientists say pumping for water is the equivalent of using up your bank savings and that bank account is dwindling. this could have serious implications. conflicts over water are as old as the story of noah in 3000 bc. the institute lists 225 such conflicts through history. what's fascinating is that nearly half of those conflicts take place in the last two decades. are we going to see a new era of wars fought over water? consider the nasa study is of one of the most voltile regions in the world. we tend to think of the middle east and its upheavals as defined by oil. perhaps in the future, they will be defined by water. we often talk about a world of nuclear have and have nots but a world of water have and have notes can be more dangerous. part of the problem is that the world's needs have changed. look at the population boom.

we've gone from 4 billion people in 1975 to about 7 billion today. the u.n. projects will hit 9 billion by 2050. meanwhile as india, china and africa continues to add millions to their middle classes global demand for food and products will increase. all of these products cost money except for water, which we like to think of as abundant and free. yet water is the resource we need to worry most about. according to the world health organization, more than 7780 million people that's two times the u.s. as our needs expand, so will that shortfall. what can be done? well, most of our water is actually wasted. and the united states is actually one of the worst culprits. we can change that. singapore already treats sewage

water to convert it into clean drinking water. we might need to consider large-scale descalization where saudi arabia are world leaders. agriculture uses up as much as 70% of water. we need to fund research into more effective crops. perhaps most simple and effective would be to put some kind of price on water. so that people use it with a greater sense of efficiency and care. all kinds of innovations are under way and i hope nasa and accelerates those processes. we link to their work on cnn.com/fareed. next month, the u.n. will mark world water day and the international year of water cooperation. it's a good time to start thinking about big global measures to regulate the world's most important resource. up next, another global issue to worry about. falling asteroids and meteors.

the astrophysicist neil degrasse tyson is next. ♪

♪ if loving you is wrong ♪ i don't wanna be right [ record scratch ] what?! it's not bad for you. it just tastes that way. [ female announcer ] honey nut cheerios cereal -- heart-healthy, whole grain oats. you can't go wrong loving it. bee happy. bee healthy. with clusters of flakes and o's. oh, ho ho... it's the honey sweetness. i...i mean, you...love. how did i know? well, i didn't really. see, i figured low testosterone would decrease my sex drive... but when i started losing energy and became moody... that's when i had an honest conversation with my doctor. we discussed all the symptoms... then he gave me some blood tests. showed it was low t. that's it. it was a number -- not just me. [ male announcer ] today, men with low t have androgel 1.62% (testosterone gel). the #1 prescribed topical testosterone replacement therapy, increases testosterone when used daily.

women and children should avoid contact with application sites. discontinue androgel and call your doctor if you see unexpected signs of early puberty in a child, or signs in a woman, which may include changes in body hair or a large increase in acne, possibly due to accidental exposure. men with breast cancer or who have or might have prostate cancer, and women who are or may become pregnant or are breastfeeding, should not use androgel. serious side effects include worsening of an enlarged prostate, possible increased risk of prostate cancer, lower sperm count, swelling of ankles, feet, or body, enlarged or painful breasts, problems breathing during sleep, and blood clots in the legs. tell your doctor about your medical conditions and medications, especially insulin, corticosteroids, or medicines to decrease blood clotting. so...what do men do when a number's too low? turn it up! [ male announcer ] in a clinical study, over 80% of treated men had their t levels restored to normal. talk to your doctor about all your symptoms. get the blood tests. change your number. turn it up. androgel 1.62%.

get the blood tests. change your number. turn it up. ♪ (train horn) vo: wherever our trains go, the economy comes to life. norfolk southern. one line, infinite possibilities. then you're going to love this. right now they're only $14.95! wow-a grt deal just got a whole lot better. hurry. $14.95 won't last. i'm candy crowley in washington with a check of the headlines. the daytona 500 will go on as scheduled today, despite a crash at the track saturday that left

at least 28 people injured. the accident happened when one of several cars that piled up crashed into a fence, sending flying debris into the stands. none of the drivers was injured. most of those who were hurt were treated at the site or nearby hospitals and released. pope benedict xvi delivered his final sunday blessing before a huge crowd at st. peter's square. he told worshippers he will continue to serve the church through prayer and meditation. the movie industry is just hours away from handing out its biggest prize. the 85th annual academy awards is tonight in los angeles. "lincoln" and "argo" are considered the favorites to win best motion picture. the oscar ceremony televised live in 225 countries worldwide. those are your headlines. "reliable sources" at the top of the hour and now back to fareed zakaria "gps." the meteor that exploded

over the euro mountains nine days ago and the asteroid that followed it raised concerns around the world. why didn't we know the meteor was coming and what are we going to do for the next close call? are we sitting targets? the director of the planetarium is with us. >> thanks for having me back on the show. >> first of all, should we be worried or is this just a complete coincidence that these two things happened? >> yes. first, it was a coincidence that they happened on the same day, just to clarify for those who might not have remembered, early morning an asteroid that entered earth's atmosphere in russia and exploded in mid-air about 20 miles up. it shattered windows and the blast was brighter than multiple suns. in fact, subsequent measurements of how much energy it contained

rivals 30 times that of the huroche mu bomb. it exploded so high up in the atmosphere. all that was left was the energy that remained after diluted into the space in which it exploded. later in the day, another asteroid that had a close approach, which we have known for about a year knowing the laws of physics and trajectory, you can see where it was going to come. it not only became between us and the moon, we have tracked many that did that. this one came inside our technological space. it came closer than our orbiting communication satellites. that one you take note of. that asteroid is half the size of a football field and the one that hit and exploded over russia and that is about a third of that size. we have no capacity to protect earth from things that small. >> so, what should we be doing? how scared should we be? >> we're just sitting ducks.

>> the law of math, the probability is that one of these things will hit. >> fortunately, the larger asteroid, the ones that could disrupt civilization and disrupt the energy grid and the transportation grid and the emergency services response set ups -- >> or just plain kill us. >> it will kill somebody right below it. yes, of course, we care about that. globally what deeply concerns you is that the asteroid is strong enough, you have to restart civilization. at another level you risk extincti extinction. fortunately, those are large. we have a plan in place, nasa has a plan in place to detect, map and track every single asteroid large enough to disrupt civilization. the one that exploded over russia was not large enough to disrupt civilization. they're dangerous and they can kill, but the fact that we can't track them is not as bad as not being able to track the big ones

that could really destroy us. once you know where they are, your next question would be, perhaps, do we have a plan to do something about it and the answer is no. it's all just on paper how to do it. >> what would be the plan? some kind of military, you should shoot a missile to shatter it in outspace? >> that's the macho solution. you pull one of the missiles out of the silo that have been sitting there doing nothing since the cold war and you blow the sucker out of the sky. the problem is here in america we're really good at blowing stuff up and less good at knowing where the pieces land. >> that's a metaphor for america. >> you take that where you want. you, people who have studied the problem, generally, i'm in this camp, see that a deflection scenario is more sound and more controllable. so, if this is the asteroid and sort of headed towards us, you send it one way, you send up a spaceship and they'll both feel,

the spaceship huvers and they'll both feel each other's gravity and they want to drift towards one another but you don't let that happen. you set off little retrorockets that prevent it and in the act of doing so, slowly tugs the asteroid into a new orbit. >> because the spaceship has the kind of gravitational pull? >> exactly. they want to draw towards each other. but if you don't let that happen and you constantly yank the spaceship away ever so slightly then the asteroid will chase the spaceship ever so slightly. that's all you need if you get it early enough because the tiniest change in your orbit early can completely avoid the target. of course, it's there to harm you another day. if you get really good at this, then you can have a protection system for the earth that will, that will prevent humans from going extinct. >> which seems a lotable goal. >> yeah. >> is it fair to say we don't need any innovation in physics

and engineer, we know how to do this. the question is the will and the resources to implement a plan like this. >> we use ordinary physics to know how to make this work. physics and engineering, of course, because you have to make the hardware to enable it. the price is not even all that expensive, given other activities that humans have undertaken. the problem is the asteroid that we might find that may one day hit us, you want to get it early, all right. when do we start concerning ourselves with a budget to handle it? if it's going to come in 100 years. what do you say? let our descendants worry about that and their congress? 88% of congress faces re-election every two years. so, senate and house, of course. so, that's not a long enough time scale to match the time scales that matter for our survival. plus, if an asteroid is going to strike somewhere else in the world, is it nasa that's going to take care of that? what you really want, i think, is a world organization, maybe

every country chips in proportion to their gdp, something sensible like that and then there is a pot of money. whoever has the space faring resources at the time it's necessary, space know how will tap into that money and you save the earth. i think that's a reasonable path. >> so, we have your next job all mapped out for you space czar for the world. neil degrasse, pleasure to have you. the top two politicians in the country show their disgust for each other. i'm not talking about washington, but rather iran. this has global implications. i'll explain when we come back. we help collect each year. no? oh, right. you're thinking of the 1.6 million daily customer care interactions xerox handles. or the 900 million health insurance claims we process. so, it's no surprise to you that companies depend on today's xerox for services that simplify how work gets done. which is...pretty much what we've always stood for.

with xerox, you're ready for real business. which is...pretty much what we've always stood for. google's backyard for the wbing it on challenge.. [fight bell: ding, ding] what's your preferred search engine? search engine, uhh, probably google. if we do a side by side blind test comparison, and you end up choosing google, you get an xbox. i'll bet you the xbox, you bet me your son. well let's look up what you need. okay, i would do the left. yeah? what?! i am a daddy! bing wins it! bing won. bing did win. people prefer bing over google for the web's top searches. don't believe it? go to bingiton.com and see what you're missing.

if you think the tension between president obama and house speaker boehner is bad, let me introduce you to a similar relationship, the two top politicians in the land where the animosity is extreme and out in the open. the very public feud between iran's president mahmoud ahmadinejad and the speaker of the parliament, ali larijani has gotten so bad that moeth ben had to write letters apologizing for their bad behavior with the man with the real power in the land who said the spat made him feel sad. there are implications for the

rest of the world, which eagerly wants iran to sit down at the nuclear negotiating table. joining me hooman majd and karim sadjadpour. so, what on earth is going on, hooman? this is a very public feud. >> i think it's related somewhat to the presidential elections coming up in june and ahmadinejad's desperate attempt to remain relevant after the election, unlike other presidents or the previous president who faded into obscurity. i think these determined to remain elvent. >> does he have an appeal? >> i think he has some base. the base is exaggerated by some people who are his supporters, but he does have a base among the certain segment of society and i think he's trying to appeal to a larger segment of society, including the middle class.

if you go up against the ayatollahs and against the clerical regime, which is what he's doing efefectively and has been doing for two years at this point, i think you gain support among people who dislike the idea of a theocracy to begin with. >> in america, people think of ahmadinejad as the bad guy. but here you have this odd situation where ahmadinejad is really openly fighting against the mullas who have much of the power. >> school of politics which says these are my principles if you don't like them, i have some others for you. ahmadinejad began his first term of being the supreme leader, a blugen but after saiv or eight years of being in power, he is not ready to leave the scene and a big challenge for the supreme leader in the coming months is not only helping to select the

next president of iran, but helping to managing ahmadinejad power. >> vice president biden put out these remarks. >> we would be prepared to meet bilaterally with the iranian leadership. >> that there be direct talks on the united states on a range of issues and biden said we're open to that possibility. and in response ayatollah shuts it down and says anyone who wants to go down that path, referring to ahmadinejad because ahmadinejad had seem excited by this prospect is a traitor and they're trying to bring back american domination. what is all this? >> i think you have to look at it from the iranian side. when vice president biden made that remark, i think it was a couple days later that new sanctions were put in place. this continuing pressure on iran and i think inside the administration and inside the regime, iran, the view is that unless the pressure is let up, there is no reason to talk.

i think, i don't think he completely eliminated the possibility of ever talking, having direct talks with the u.s. he repeated this a few times and other iranian officials have repeated this. if you, hold a gun, if you hold a gun to our heads, we are not going to negotiate and i think that's probably true. every time there is a lot of pressure on iran, iran has backed off negotiating because they feel they don't want to be viewed to be in a weak position. and certainly a lot of domestic politics involved here. the new program is still relatively popular in iran. they don't want to be seen to be backing off and giving in to american demands. they certainly don't want to be seen to be negotiating or making a deal because of the sanctions, because of this pressure, the pressure worked. that america can make us do something that we really don't want to dop. >> the timing looks very bad because americans have put all this pressure on the iranians and it doesn't look likely in the next month or two something will happen on the negotiating

front. >> i'm pessimistic, fareed. the cabin between obama, biden himself, secretary of defense, chuck hagel pro-iran ingaugement cabinet since the 1979 revolution. these guys seriously do want to do a deal. genuinely wants to try to build confidence with the united states, this is the best administration to do that. now, i think the dilemma he has is that for 24 years since 1989 he has been susupreme leader and he hasn't left the country since 1989 and he sought to preserve the status quo by transforming decisions and now put himself increasingly with back against the wall facing unprecedented international pressure, sanctions, et cetera whereby if he wants to reduce this pressure, either he needs to do a nuclear deal to reduce the pressure or go for nuclear weapon, the so-called pakistan

option where by if they get a bomb, they believe that the outside world will be forced to deal with them. but these are both transformative options and both transformative choices for him. so, i think he's put himself in a very comfortable position. >> he's a conservative guy by nature. >> you're a revolutionary until you acquire power and then you become a conservative. theobama administration isn't interested in going to war. they're trying to get out of the war business. i don't see 2013 being a decisive year because the obama administration is unwilling to attack and the israelis want the americans to do it and the iranians will continue to move forward in a very incremental fashion so we can avoid worse-case scenario which is a military collaboration and i also don't see a diagram in which israeli national security, iranian revolutionary ideology and u.s. domestic politics all intersect in one place.

>> fascinating conversation. thank you, both. when we come back, football players are famous for going to disney world after they win the super bowl. what do presidents of failed states do after they're deposed? find out when we come back. (train horn) vo: wherever our trains go, the economy comes to life. norfolk southern. one line, infinite possibilities. the people of bp made a commitment to the gulf., and every day since, we've worked hard to keep it. today, the beaches and gulf are open for everyone to enjoy. we've shared what we've learned, so we can all produce energy more safely. bp's also committed to america. we support nearly two-hundred-fifty thousand jobs and invest more here than anywhere else. we're working to fuel america for generations to come.

our commitment has never been stronger. i just served my mother-in-law your chicken noodle soup but she loved it so much... i told her it was homemade. everyone tells a little white lie now and then. but now she wants my recipe [ clears his throat ] [ softly ] she's right behind me isn't she? [ male announcer ] progresso. you gotta taste this soup. [ slap! ] [ slap! slap! slap! slap! ] ow! ow! [ male announcer ] your favorite foods fighting you? fight back fast with tums. calcium-rich tums starts working so fast you'll forget you had heartburn. ♪ tum tum tum tum tums now, this is a test drive. whoa! you can really el all 335 foot-pounds of torque. it's chevy truck month! the silverado is also recognized for the lowest cost of ownership. hey, what are you gonna do with it? end table. oh. [ male announcer ] it's chevy truck month. get 0% financi for 60 months, eeplus trade up to get $1,750 total allowance on a silverado all-star edition

or trade up and choose customer cash, plus option package discount for a total value of $7,250. offer ends soon.

italians are going to the polls today to vote in a parliamentary election. the italian republic has been around for less than 70 years. before that, it had been a kingdom and that brings me to my question of the week. who was the last king of italy? was it "a" victor emmanuel ii "b" victor emmanuel iii, "c" garibaldi i or "d" umberto i. this week's book will cost you $2, but it is worth much more. david leonard's ebook. "here's the deal" is the best guide to america's budget problems you're likely to find. brief, highly intelligent and genuinely fair and balanced. every voter should read it and many others, as well. go to cnn.com/fareed where we have a link. now, for the last look.

what do you do after you're deposed as president of one of the world's most terrorist infested fail states? well, if you're ali abdullah of yemen, first you come to the u.s. to recover from old bombing injuries and then back home in yemen, you announce the opening of a museum all about yourself. yes, come one, come all to sunny sana to see priceless museum pieces as large portraits, weapons given while in office and the suit he was wearing during the aforementioned bombing and shrapnel that was recovered from his body. wow. the curator says the museum is almost ready to open, as soon as they get the lights and air conditioning sorted out. i suppose this is progress of a kind, most dictators would probably keep all the stuff for themselves. the correct answer to our gps